Say what you want about Susan Bysiewicz, she’s relentless. The day before a state judge cleared the way for Secretary of the State Bysiewicz to run for state attorney general she visited Democratic Town Chair Mario Testa in his Madison Avenue restaurant to schmooze support.
SuBy is trying to tighten up her delegate support among Park City Dems against her chief rival former State Senate Majority Leader George Jepsen who has pockets of support in the city. SuBy was emboldened by the superior court decision the other day, but George will be there to poke her: will you commit to serve out your four years as AG if you’re so elected? Answer: never say yes, never say never; I am SuBy, shameless self promoter and don’t ever challenge my motives!
Translation: I want Joe Lieberman’s U.S. Senate seat in 2012.
Dem Storm Clouds
Democratic gubernatorial contenders Ned Lamont and Dan Malloy received good news in the latest www.rasmussenreports.com poll against leading GOP contenders, but Stan Greenberg, prolific Democratic pollster, has distributed a memo sounding a huge storm warning for November. Dems nationally are in trouble with unaffiliated voters and seniors and could fall prey to voter lethargy among its base. Check out a portion of Greenberg’s memo:
How to Survive 2010
A Year-Long Project Tracking the Participation and Preference Among the Rising American Electorate
Democrats need to make substantial political progress in the next six months. The basic problem is math. Currently independent voters prefer Republicans over Democrats by two to one in congressional trial heats. Other groups, such as blue collar whites and white seniors are similarly lopsided in their preferences. More competitive margins are possible with these groups, but that could come too late, and there are more immediate places to make up the numbers.
Good places to start are among unmarried women, young people and people of color. Voters we call the Rising American Electorate (RAE), who make up the majority of the voting age population in the country and voters who drove progressive victories in 2006 and 2008. They remain supportive but not nearly in the same numbers. They can help rescue Democrats from a very forgettable electoral cycle in 2010. Unmarried women alone make up 25 percent of the population and can have the biggest impact.
This joint project by Women’s Voices Women Vote Action Fund and Democracy Corps highlights distinct opportunities among these voters, but also core problems that need real attention and major political investments to make right.
Voters in the Rising American Electorate are less engaged than other voters. Historically, these voters typically drop out of off-year elections in greater than average numbers. This survey continues to show a turn out problem, which we have tracked all year among these voters.
Rell At UB Graduation
Governor M. Jodi Rell received an honorary degree from the University of Bridgeport at Commencement ceremonies on May 8.
Governor Rell opened the 100th graduation ceremony with greetings to graduates and their families. She received a Doctor of Humane Letters, honoris causa.
One of the most popular governors in state history, Rell became Connecticut’s 87th governor in 2004 after John Rowland’s resignation. She was overwhelmingly elected to a full term on November 7, 2006.
University Trustee Mark Fries ’73 received the Distinguished Alumni Award.
Alumnus Shintaro Akatsu ’88 was given the Colin “Ben” Gunn Award for Philanthropy.
New Top Prosecutor
David Fein has been confirmed as U.S. attorney for Connecticut, the state’s chief federal law enforcement officer. One decision Fein could be involved in, if it hasn’t been made already, is deciding whether to pursue federal charges against Shelton Mayor Marc Lauretti who the feds have investigated for many years. The case against Lauretti is thin. Shelton developer James Botti has been convicted on tax charges and trying to influence development decisions in Shelton, but a federal jury was hung on the Lauretti-related charges the government brought against Botti. From Ed Mahony, Hartford Courant:
The U.S. Senate on Wednesday confirmed President Barack Obama’s nomination of David B. Fein, former White House lawyer and federal prosecutor, as Connecticut’s next U.S. attorney.
Fein, whose appointment was widely expected, was confirmed by the full Senate on a voice vote.
It was unclear when Fein would take over the duties of the state’s senior federal law enforcement officer. He could not be reached early Wednesday night following the vote.
Fein, of Greenwich, has been a partner in the law firm of Wiggin and Dana since 1997 and was one of four potential nominees proposed to the White House by U.S. Sens. Christopher Dodd and Joseph Lieberman.
As U.S. attorney, he will supervise a staff of lawyers who prosecute federal crimes and represent the federal government’s interests in Connecticut.
Fein, 49, was an associate White House counsel during President Bill Clinton’s administration. Clinton supported his appointment as Connecticut’s chief federal prosecutor.
He replaces U.S. Attorney Nora Dannehy. Dannehy was named to the position on an interim basis when her predecessor, Kevin O’Connor, took a senior administrative position in the U.S. Department of Justice under the administration of President George W. Bush.
At Wiggin and Dana, Fein is chairman of the firm’s white-collar defense, investigations and corporate compliance group. He represents clients in criminal investigations, leads investigations for corporate clients and advises clients on corporate compliance matters.
Two years ago, Fein defended an executive of the health care retailer CVS Caremark who was charged with 23 felonies in an alleged scheme to bribe a Rhode Island state senator. The executive was acquitted after a monthlong trial at federal district court in Rhode Island.
Immediately before joining Wiggin and Dana, Fein worked in the White House counsel’s office from 1995 to 1996, and was involved in Clinton administration anti-crime initiatives and policies on victims’ rights and tobacco use by children.
From 1989 to 1995, he was an assistant U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York.
Let’s Eat
Hey, the mayor loves grilled sardines, anchovy on his pizza, and a strong martini (can you blame him)? Check this out:
Bridgeport Launches Restaurant and Entertainment Week, May 17-23
Bridgeport is proud to announce the first annual “What’s Cooking in Bridgeport” week from May 17 to May 23, 2010. What’s Cooking in Bridgeport is a week long event showcasing the unique range of dining and entertainment options across the Park City. Throughout the week, 35 restaurants and 6 entertainment venues are offering special promotions, providing a great opportunity for people across the region to enjoy food and fun in Connecticut’s largest city. From 2-for-1 prices to free appetizer, drink and dessert specials, What’s Cooking in Bridgeport has something for everyone.
“What’s Cooking in Bridgeport is an opportunity for everyone in Fairfield County and beyond to discover and enjoy all the wonderful restaurant and entertainment venues Bridgeport has to offer,” said Mayor Bill Finch.
Participating restaurants include Amici Miei Café, Angelo’s Restaurant, Ash Creek Saloon, Beverly Pizza House, Brennan’s Shebeen, Café Roma, Café Tavolini, Captain’s Pizza House, El Agave, El Latino Restaurant, Épernay Bistro, The Field, Frankie’s Diner, The Grand Deli, Jerry’s Shakespeare Pizza #2, Jimmy and Maria’s Corporate Deli, Joseph’s Steakhouse, Luigi’s Italian Pastry, Metric Bar & Grill, Panda Chinese Restaurant, Park Luncheonette, People’s Choice Restaurant, Ralph ‘n’ Rich’s, Ramirez Restaurant, Taberna Food and Wine Bar, Taco Loco, Take Time Café, Tatane Restaurant, Testo’s Restaurant, Tiago’s Restaurant and Bar, Tuscany Ristorante, Two Boots of Bridgeport, Uncle Tricky’s Drive-In and Vazzy’s Brick Oven Restaurant.
Participating entertainment venues include The Barnum Museum, Connecticut’s Beardsley Zoo, The Discovery Museum, Downtown Cabaret Theatre, The Klein Memorial Auditorium and Playhouse on the Green.
What’s Cooking in Bridgeport is a collaboration between members of the Bridgeport Regional Business Council’s Leadership Greater Bridgeport program and the City of Bridgeport. Sponsors include TD Bank, The United Illuminating Company, and Greater Bridgeport Transit.
To take advantage of What’s Cooking in Bridgeport specials and track updates on participating restaurants and venues online, visit www.facebook.com/pages/Bridgeport-CT/Whats-Cooking-in-Bridgeport/287627640737 or email whatscooking.bpt@gmail.com.
From Dan Malloy:
MALLOY LOOKS BACK ON LEGISLATIVE SESSION
Says Connecticut ‘can’t keep running from its problems’
Former Stamford Mayor and current Democratic candidate for Governor Dan Malloy today released the following statement at the close of the Legislative session:
“These are difficult times. With Connecticut’s budget so far into the red, it’s no secret that expectations were lowered heading into this Legislative session. However, even during tough times we need to expect more than what we got. Once again, the State has put off making tough decisions, choosing instead to delay our problems one more year.
“The budget dominated this session, and rightfully so. The final product was not what most people wanted, even those who voted in favor of it. There are some good aspects – we did not completely decimate the critical social services relied upon by our state’s most needy, it appears we’ve managed to alleviate some of the electric rate burden on consumers, and the Governor’s misguided attempts at another Early Retirement Program were thwarted. However, the budget failed to address the severe structural problems we face or the projected $3 billion deficit for 2011-2012 fiscal years. Instead, it relies on quick fixes – such as once again raiding the state employees’ pension fund – that do nothing but put off our problems until after the next Governor is sworn in.
“In addition to the budget, I was also disappointed that the Legislature failed to take up paid sick leave legislation. As I said numerous times throughout the session, this isn’t just about workers’ rights, it’s about public health. As Governor, I would pursue this issue.
“One highlight that our Legislators should be applauded for was the energy bill. This legislation will help make Connecticut more energy efficient, it will encourage advancement in green technology, and it will reduce air pollution and green house gasses. It’s the kind of bold, forward-thinking initiatives we need to be taking, and it’s my hope that the Governor signs it into law.
“Another positive development was the Legislature’s decision to allow for a special session in the coming months to make any necessary changes to the Citizens’ Election Fund. In doing so, they’ve made clear their intention to protect this program, and to support clean elections in Connecticut. It’s crucial that we show our support for CEP with action, and not just words – the Legislature did just that.
“Like most sessions, we have to take the good with the bad. Some will tell you that during trying times we need to buckle down and ‘just get by.’ I disagree. I think that now more than ever Connecticut residents see what is broken in our Government, and they’re ready to make bold changes for the future. We shouldn’t let anyone tell us it’s not possible.”
SuBy will win. Lamont has a double-digit lead!!! I think Republicans do not stand a chance. Once Ned and Malloy started running ads I predict it will be over for Republicans. But this can mean bad news for Ned in the primary because some people might say now that Malloy can win also so they change over to Malloy.
Back to Immigration!!! Something needs to be done about it. I am no supporter of the Arizona Law but I saw a video that just pissed me off and made me think very strong against illegal immigration. My parents are immigrants and they came here the right way why can’t others do the same!!! Up to this day I feel sorry for the family of the 4 college students who were killed by illegal immigrants … watch the video.
www .youtube.com/watch?v=-p5UZMH6jP4
I hope Obama will get at this issue; we are a nation of laws and something needs to be done with illegal immigration. I hate when I see Al Sharpton come out and say everything is racist why didn’t he come out for those family members and speak up about how illegals affect the inner city!!! When i see videos and stuff like that it makes me wonder what is the point of even voting for these do-nothing politicians. I am pretty sure if America wanted to crack down on illegals they could. I am 100 pro-immigrant and 100% anti-illegal. We are a nation of laws and they should be applied to everyone.
We may be a nation of laws. What we should be is a nation of civil rights. If history is any indication … The foreigners who came here in 1400/1500s enslaved, raped and murdered the original inhabitants of this country. Who were probably ancestors of those we are calling illegals now.
The slavers, rapists and murderers who arrived in this country in the 1400s and 1500s arrived legally.
You would be surprised at how much support the Arizona law has received. We all know and understand the solution to this country’s massive debt position is widespread full employment. Payments under the table to illegals who then send large amounts of untaxed cash out of the country seriously undermines any hope we have for fiscal recovery. It’s not a civil rights issue; it’s a matter of upholding existing law.
Legally? By whose standards? Ask a Native American how they felt. Are you saying only anglo laws count?
If you’re not happy with the US; we don’t hold anyone hostage. GET THE F*** OUT.
America’s Laws Count and if you don’t like them then I suggest you work to change them or move to a country whose laws you like.
*** Just how did these land-grabbing slavers, etc. arrive in America “legally?” Did they come with a work visa, maybe an educational visa or seeking political asylum? Also most immigrants past & present have always tried to send money to their families abroad, really nothing new! Fact is America has always used immigrant slave labor when the economy is good to do many labor type jobs. Once the job’s done or the economy becomes bad, American law would find an excuse to send the immigrants packing! It’s happened many times in history, especially to the Mexican people. There are many reasons for this particular law in Arizona, homeland security, economy, crime, jobs and city or town public services along with health services just to name a few with a touch of racism sprinkled on the top no doubt. ***
Amen.
Get over it; we didn’t suck off the system, we worked hard. Being in this country illegal is a federal offense.
*** Just who exactly is we, does that mean you? Maybe you should check yourself before you wreck yourself! If it’s such a Fed. offense why has the fed. government waited so long to do something after so many illegals have entered America? And why is it more illegal when the U.S economy is suffering? Also the prior blog opinion is nothing more than that, like your opinions. Which doesn’t call for a disrespectful response either! It’s really nothing more than a person’s view on some of America’s problems. ***
Hector if you go back as far as you state the original foreigners were the Spanish who enslaved the Mexican Indians and basically wiped them out.
It’s amazing not one of you commented on the fact illegal aliens drain the economy of untaxed wages which they further remove from the economy when they send money to other countries. Yet the illegal alien is first in line for free health care and other public assistance including illegally enrolling their foreign-born children in our schools without contributing one red cent in the taxes that support public programs.
Frankly, there are few illegals who are bad people. Much like the “illegals” who arrived at the turn of the 20th century, an entire national culture is formed. More European immigrants disembarked illegally at the docks of the Palisades in NYC than actually were processed legally at Ellis Island, a few miles down river. Nearly all, if not all, of us are derivative in some manner of foreign-born ancestry. The success of our nation is born on the backs of the men and women who came here to find a better life. Today it is for the same reason. The difference is clear. The European immigrant of the early 20th century, legal or illegal, contributed to our emerging society. Today, the illegal takes from an economy that can only succeed if employment grows to an extent that statutory payroll tax is collected in sufficient amounts to mediate our national debt. There is no other way to restore financial security than to remove all barriers to full employment.
A civil rights issue? Hardly. These men and women work hard, very hard. I admire them for their work ethic and skill and pride. But I cannot tolerate the illegality that their presence perpetuates. Too much depends on restoring stability to our economy. The illegal population is a clear and present danger to any success we may hope for in that regard.
I wish blanket amnesty could work. I truly believe many who are here illegally would be an asset to our country. Sadly, amnesty cannot work. There are too many Americans out of work desperately seeking jobs and far too many Americans who do not want to work preferring to perpetually suckle the entitlement teat for all it’s worth.
The devil in the illegal issue is not the illegal. It is the unscrupulous people who deny Americans employment and the US economy the benefit of payroll tax each time they hire an illegal at a low wage from which no tax is collected.
Stone I actually agree with you on this. Also I would like to clarify to those who misunderstood me that while you are talking about “getting out” We Puerto Ricans are natives to America. When Columbus returned on his second voyage it was Puerto Rico where he landed. In fact his brother was left to “GOVERN.” Understand that I love and respect this COUNTRY almost as much as I love Bridgeport.
Marlys,
With regard to yesterday’s post. I don’t think either Lamont or Ambassador Foley are chumps. I think they built their huge fortunes based on inheritance and business smarts. Lots of business smarts. However if on the other hand you have a candidate(s) who has been through the public budget process over and over again and the product is significant economic growth and jobs, reduction in the mil rate and growth in population, you have someone who has not theoretically been though a process; you have experience. Apples and pears in my opinion.
Running government like a business is rhetoric. Running government so it provides the services residents and businesses need but not more than is necessary takes real experience in that public pressure cooker. All I am saying is we are fortunate to have two candidates, Malloy and Glassman who fit that bill. The choice couldn’t be clearer to me.
As far as I am concerned both Lamont & Malloy are Democratic retreads. Malloy tried for governor 4 years ago and could not get the nomination. Lamont ran for the senate, got the nomination and lost the election. To me they are both losers. To me it shows the poor state of the Democratic party when these are the only candidates we can come up with for governor.
While I am at it let me ask Himes a question on health care: Were you aware it is going to be cheaper for major employers such as Verizon, Caterpillar and other companies of that size to drop employee health insurance and pay the government fine? Where does that leave the employees? Shopping in the expensive insurance market as individuals? How many more glitches are in this health care bill?
*** What major bills in history that affected so many did not have post “glitches?” Also, losing an election first time ’round does not make any candidates individual personal losers. After all your T/C endorsed one of them & you also lost in your run for city council! Does that event make you a loser or a person who feels change is needed to improve your district overall? In political change there are usually unforeseen events & items that need some type of tweaking along the way, which end up affecting us all, good or bad! ***
*** Since I don’t live in Arizona, I really don’t know the type of impact that an overrun on undocumented immigrants pose on the state’s economy, city services, schools, crime, etc. in general. But it must be really getting out of control if a bill like this was passed overwhelmingly & signed by the Gov. Times have changed drastically in many ways & the population explosion has added to the stress of the economy in many ways. What was okay in the past is no longer being accepted by the American Public due to economics, homeland security, cost and racism in general. Whatever each & every ethic group has contributed in the past, present & future makes their place in American society today. But America & all her greatness & history cannot wait blindly ’til there’s no vacancy or jobs @ the Inn! Let’s take care of our own 50 states’ borders & U.S. territories “first” so we may be able to help others! We need to understand history & learn from the past so we can move forward into the future! *** How many people can you fit in a V/W, “ese?” ***
You don’t have to go to Arizona. Check out the schools here in Bridgeport; about 50% illegals …
Last night at the circus I saw 11 clowns get out of a Volkswagen Rabbit.
Democratic politics: in the ideal world Glassman would be the best Democratic candidate for governor. In the real world she can’t compete with Lamont and Malloy. Money and name recognition ended it for her. So looking at reality, Malloy supporters need to look at his record. All this talk about running a great city. The greatness was handed to him. Stamford’s growth started in the ’70s and not under Malloy. He rode the wave. But what you should be looking at is the Stamford long-term debt. Malloy gave the people what he thought they wanted at the expense of future generations. The people were happy and Malloy became the wonder child. Check the facts, check the debt Stamford is handing over to its children, check the office vacancy rate and high cost of living. Malloy’s solutions seek to benefit Malloy’ ego. I think Lamont is the lesser of two evils.
Independent Soul,
I worked for the three Mayors in the City of Stamford from 1974-1984. In 1984 I left Stamford to work for the Cuomo Administration in Albany and the World Trade Center. Back in 1974, downtown Stamford looked worse than downtown Bridgeport does today. Really, much worse. Stamford had a 100-acre urban renewal area downtown with one pre-selected developer (double the size of the steel point peninsula). Lots of buildings were torn down, historic buildings I might add and thousands of people were scattered to the wind with lots landing in Bridgeport. Then the New York City fiscal crisis happened in the mid 1970s and companies were bailing out of the big apple and headed closer to where their execs were living; lower Fairfield County. Lower Fairfield was and still is the bedroom community for NYC. We did everything we could to grab those companies and have them locate along Long Ridge and High Ridge Road. We had “Church of What’s Happening Now” meetings weekly to get their foundations in ground before the State DOT knew what happened. The developer Bob Rich was also capturing companies to produce the lineup along I-95; Singer, GTE, Champion International to name a few. Then Al Taubman showed up and bullied his way into building the Stamford Town Center Mall, all internal with no windows or relationship to pedestrians and absolutely no connection to the rest of the old downtown. The nights in Stamford were like a ghost town. Everyone left at 5pm. By the time I left, Stamford was the third-largest home to corporate headquarters in the nation. The first was New York, then Chicago, then Stamford.
In the early ’80s the City totally revamped its master plan and zoning under a Jon Smith and Robin Stein to allow the downtown to have mixed-use buildings, restaurants and bars without the 100-foot rule separating the sale of liquor and lots of walkability amenities. The train and bus station happened. Then Stamford’s Downtown started to really take off.
Bridgeport’s master plan and zoning is now done, effective January 1, 2010. It will finally allow the same mixed-use development and restaurant/bar development like Stamford did in the early 1980s. Bridgeport will go much farther than Stamford since Bridgeport has 22 miles of water that can now be recaptured for public access. Stamford’s downtown is nowhere near the water. They have enhanced the Mill River through a great collaborative but Bridgeport has much more water to work with as well as the Intermodal Transportation Center.
Yes Stamford had a great foundation from which Dan Malloy could govern. However in his 14 years he really accomplished much more good than evil as you phrase it. Much more good. He also learned a lot about how government works and doesn’t work. Call it his learning curve or training ground to tackle what he will face in Hartford.
Bring the kids and grandkids to downtown Bridgeport this afternoon. SportsFest is happening. Come say hi!
Look what I have created, an Immigration Battle on OIB … As I said I do not support illegal immigration, but I support legal immigration my parents were immigrants my whole family are immigrants. Justice I think you went overboard. Who are we??? White people??? Last time I checked they did not come here legally. We are a nation of laws now so people must enforce them.
Attorney Henry Lyons III. May you rest in richly deserved peace.
Was he any relation to former speaker Moira Lyons?
Neither of the two major political parties want to do anything about illegal immigration. The Dems don’t want to upset the Hispanics who by and large vote for Democrats and the Republicans don’t want to piss off Big Business which is taking advantage of illegal workers.
Clinton & Bush tried to push immigration reform and both failed.
The interesting part of this debate is we are talking about the US and its immigration policy. Let’s take a brief look at Mexico’s immigration policy which largely effects immigrants from Central America who enter Mexico. In Mexico if they are caught it’s an automatic 2-year prison term. Just food for thought.
Most Cubans are registered Republican. Take a look at the numbers in Florida. I believe they’ve never forgiven Democrats (Kennedy) for the Bay of Pigs disaster.
Hector A. Diaz you are on the money they were the reason why Bush won in 2000 and 2004 Hispanics went for Bush in Florida. That is why Rove is against the Arizona Bill because the Bush Admin worked their ass off on making a lot of Hispanics join the Republican party. Bush as a whole got over 40% of the Hispanic vote in 2004 and I still can’t believe that but they did. In Florida it was even better he won over 50% of the Hispanics there. In 2008 Republicans lost that voting block by a large margin and Barrack won the Hispanic vote in Florida big time. Cubans even voted for Obama in large number also. Without the Hispanic vote Republicans will never regain the White House and that’s a fact. They do not have to win the Hispanic vote but they cannot lose it 2 to 1 like they did in 2008. And as of this moment the Republican party is pushing away Hispanics in large numbers. If there is one thing I give GB credit for is he appealed to Hispanics and now the Republicans are letting that group go. Obama will easily win Hispanics in 2012 like he did in 2008.
donj You could be right on the money but as Obama waffles on immigration and with his unpopular Health care plan and the yet to come Value Added Tax he is losing the main group of voters that put him in office and that is the Independent voters. If he does not return that group which is the largest single voting block out there he can’t win in 2012. Note I did not say he won’t win.
Malloy Myth #1
Support Malloy because Lamont cannot win a statewide general election against a Republican.
Hello, Dan Malloy could not win his only try at a statewide Democratic primary. Why would anyone think Dan’s statewide exposure has grown in the past four years? As a matter of fact it is shrinking because Dan was so terrified of losing if he ran for mayor again he “retired.”
Remember he almost lost in his last mayoral election to a complete unknown.
Ned Lamont beat a multi-term incumbent with strong statewide recognition in his Democratic primary. No gubernatorial candidate the Republicans are considering has anywhere near the statewide name recognition Joe Lieberman has.
Dan Malloy lost to another big-city mayor with a similar background and a similar recognition factor.
Until Dan wins ANY kind of statewide election his supporters should abandon this argument.
Malloy Myth #2
Congressman Jim Himes needs Malloy to head the ticket if Himes has any chance of being re-elected. Nonsense.
Jim Himes needs to win on his own regardless of who heads the ticket. But he will have Dick Blumenthal’s name right before his in the general election. That will be more powerful than Dan Malloy.
And besides ask Mary Glassman how wide and how strong Malloy’s coattails are. As much of an unknown in the gubernatorial primary as anyone, she surged past Dan Malloy on her own to win the LG spot.
And ask Mary Glassman if Dan Malloy is such a strong candidate, why did she choose to run with Lamont and from Malloy?
Malloy Myth #3
Malloy is a polished urban leader. He knows economic development. He built Stamford into the city it is today. More nonsense.
Read Nancy Hadley’s post above. All the major development in Stamford was in the works long before Dan Malloy became mayor.
The major projects that took place under Malloy’s tenure were spurred on due to tax breaks from the State of Connecticut DECD. Major businesses went straight to Hartford or were sent there by Stamford. And unfortunately many of these DECD grants and tax breaks require significant commitments from the businesses and when the businesses fail to live up to their end of the bargain the state normally lets them off of the hook.
We need government that will steer the development to distressed municipalities and will force corporations to comply with their part of the equation.
This is a foreign concept to Dan Malloy.
Some facts to go along with your rhetoric.
Undocumented Immigrants Pay More in Taxes Than They Receive in Benefits
Monday 03 May 2010
by: Alberto Ponce de León | El Diario de El Paso (the United States)
During their working life, undocumented immigrants in the United States will pay, on average, approximately $80,000 more in taxes per capita than they use in government services, owing to the fact that they are not eligible to take advantage of almost all of the social service programs offered by the federal government, according to a study released by the National Council of La Raza.
According to the report, in June of 2007, the president’s Council of Economic Advisers stated that the “impact of undocumented immigration on public budgets is likely to be very positive.”
The report cites the Texas Comptroller’s disclosure that, in 2006, undocumented immigrants paid about $424.7 million more in state revenues – including sales tax and school property tax – than they used in state services, including education and health care.
In addition to sales and property taxes, [an estimated three-quarters] of undocumented immigrants also pay payroll taxes through the use of false Social Security numbers.
According to statistics from the National Council of La Raza, these employees contribute approximately $7 billion to Social Security and $1.5 billion to Medicare every year, despite the fact that they are ineligible to receive these benefits. These numbers serve to counter arguments, promoted by anti-immigration forces, that undocumented immigrants are a drain on the state.
“These immigrants’ contributions to these programs are collected by the federal government to help it meet its goals,” according to the National Council of La Raza.
According to the national report, the majority of undocumented laborers also receive a very low salary, and often have no protections against workplace abuse.
In 2005, more than 1.5 million undocumented immigrants in the United States worked as either housekeepers or domestic laborers. Because of their legal status, these immigrants received an average weekly salary of $355 in 2006. The national average for this line of work in that same year was $671 a week.
Another challenge confronting undocumented workers in the United States is the fact that they often find themselves living below the poverty level, yet, unable to apply for economic assistance programs [such as food stamps, SCHIP and Medicaid] that low-income people with legal status are eligible to receive.
In El Paso, Texas, with the aim of rectifying workplace abuse and the exploitation of undocumented laborers, the Paso Del Norte Civil Rights Project launched the Economic Justice Program in September of 2009. Within a month of the program’s initiation, at least five El Paso workers, the majority of whom are undocumented, had won labor disputes against their former employers through negotiations with the assistance of the organization.
Chris Benoit, a legal representative of the organization, believes that workers’ rights are human rights, regardless of the migratory status of the individual.
Translation: Ryan Croken.
Ryan Croken is a freelance writer and editor based in Chicago. His essays and book reviews have appeared in The Philadelphia Inquirer, Z Magazine and ReligionDispatches.org. He can be reached at ryan.croken@gmail.com.
All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.
MCAT maybe you should research La Raza and what they stand for. Here is a small version but I suggest you read the entire mission statement.
Largest Hispanic organization in the U.S. Lobbies for racial preferences, bilingual education, stricter hate-crimes laws, mass immigration, and amnesty for illegal aliens.
Do you really believe the day workers that gather at the corner of Madison & Grande St are paying Social Security through the illegal contractors hiring them? BS.
Sure they are paying sales tax on items they buy where does the property tax they are alleged to pay come from? The rent they pay. Biased articles you cite really have no hard facts to back up the claims they make. By the way how does illegal immigration affect a nice bedroom community like Monroe? Not much. I can tell you it does effect the job market here in Bridgeport.
So Bob, do you see Lamont, whose claim to fame is successful business owner, cracking down on businesses that fail to meet their obligations? And Malloy who has been quite successful managing a municipality, no matter what the conditions (Remember we had a surplus before George Bush, and that didn’t stop him from flushing the country down the drain) as not caring about big cities? Further, Lamont lost the general because he did not appeal to moderates or unaffiliated voters. In addition to Democrats you have to win the middle to win an election. I find most of your above logic highly flawed.
“So Bob, do you see Lamont, whose claim to fame is successful business owner, cracking down on businesses that fail to meet their obligations?”
I do. Lamont talks about how we shouldn’t bet on companies that are bouncing around to dodge their taxes–they hit the road the moment the first time there’s a dollar in it.
And politically speaking, Malloy is running *from* being a big-city mayor. He’s so afraid of being seen raising taxes he made cuts to the pension fund so deep the ratings agencies downgraded Stamford’s bond rating (and has always opposed the estate tax even though it’s the equivalent of free puppies and candy). Ned, on the other hand, can’t be accused of bringing home the bacon for his hometown, and is, in a way, running from being a wealthy businessman. That’s the best place from which to make a moral case for a tax policy that draws from top earners to rebuild the state’s infrastructure.
I never agree with Walsh but he is correct. Tc you are correct to an extent. I do not think Independent voters will shift in such a way that would cost him an election. Remember he won the popular vote by nearly 10 million votes. That’s a shitload of votes he won by. Obama could have lost Florida lost Ohio and lost New Mexico and he would still have won the election by a wide margin!!! Obama was declared the winner of the 2008 election before a projection was even made in those States. What I am saying is it would have to be a 2 to 1 shift that will not happen!!!
Ms. Hadley, Thanks for the history lesson on development in Stamford. You made my case very well that the groundwork and early successes in Stamford made Malloy’s life easier. All he had to do was keep the ball rolling. And he did!!! On the coattails of the people of Stamford whose taxes will pay for all those capital improvements.
I applaud your early work to kick-start Stamford and lately Bridgeport. Too bad the political leadership of Bridgeport doesn’t see it. But please, don’t equate Stamford success with Dan Malloy. He may have been a successful Mayor in some people’s opinion, but he is not the savior.
Lamont is a sellout, selling out to the Madison Ave crew and trying to buy an election.
When Foley wins in a landslide Lamont will try to buy the mayor of this sellout town in 2011.
Delegates have been told to pick Lamont even if they back Malloy.
Business as usual … kiss the ring of the machine you sellout.
I don’t know where you get your information but as a town committee member I have not been asked or told to vote for Lamont by Testa or anyone else.
Are you a delegate?
Nancy,
You may remember Bob Rich but it was F.D. Rich who was named the preferred developer in downtown Stamford who really got the ball rolling.
As opposed to Eric Anderson who was given downtown Bridgeport to develop and has done a horrible job. And please don’t let him off the hook by claiming it was the downturn in the economy.
If he had completed his projects on time and within costs he would have been done by the time the economy went south.
Bob,
Bob Rich was F.D. Rich. I was in dozens and dozens of meetings with him and Irwin Silver as they moved to develop Stamford’s downtown as a two-level city. Please remember the Feds gave Stamford hundreds of millions of dollars to accomplish that 100-acre development. During my tenure, I did the grant work to get the final $25 million close-out grant for that Urban Renewal Project due to the fantastic heavy lifting by Congressman Stewart McKinney. Please remember Stamford knocked everything down where Bridgeport has focused on the historic rehabilitation of its treasures. It is much harder to do historic rehab but that is what is intrinsic to Bridgeport.
Eric Anderson did NOT do a horrible job in the downtown. I have just signed my fourth lease at City Trust. It is fully occupied. So are the Arcade apartments and most of 144 Golden Hill. I have written long OIB posts on the history of the $60 million in private-sector financing Eric Anderson secured for City Trust, Arcade and 144 Golden Hill. The only state leverage was about $3.1 million. That is about 5% of the deals where the other cities are getting 30-40% state gap financing in their deals. The banks were and are still uneasy about the Bridgeport market and unfortunately the State Bond Commission and CHFA have not provided them the comfort they need. That is why the Kuchma deal on the corner of Lafayette and Fairfield needed $10+ million and Carlson’s 333 State Street deal needed $11+ million of GE MONEY financing to make their private investment pencil out. Eric Anderson has been waiting and waiting for CHFA to finish Kuchma and Carlson before dealing with the Newfield and Jason buildings on the east side of Main Street.
As far as I am concerned Eric Anderson was the first private developer to get Wachovia and US BankCorp to invest in Bridgeport. It was hard, it was long, he made mistakes, the city made mistakes, UI was slow to come to the decision about the energy levels in the streets; there was a total standoff between the State Historic Preservation Commission and Fire Marshal that tied the project up in historic rehab knots.
As far as I am concerned Anderson, Trefz, and Kuchma picked up where David Carson’s very bold move with People’s Bank headquarters left off and are moving the ball forward, despite the economy. That movement enticed Spinnaker and Forstone to invest. But please, understand Stamford had huge federal and state resources to help them starting way back in the late ’60s. That is fifty years of progress by politically savvy leaders and top-flight development teams. In my opinion, Bridgeport has been able to garner chump change from the State to fill the development gap. That isn’t the fault of the developers. It is a new day for Bridgeport. We now have seven great developers and excellent land use policies. Now we all have to get on the same page and push for the best Hartford leadership to be Bridgeport’s real partner. We haven’t had that partnership since Lowell Weicker.
Lamont is a phony. Mr. campaign finance reform phony. Buy an election, sell out to Mario Testa. Blech. Blech. Blech. Blech. Three-card Lamonte.
NON SELLOUTS
Caruso
Gomes
Ayala Jr.
If the 3 teamed up in 2011, it would be the biggest victory in Bridgeport history.
Question would only be who would take top spot, not would the machine be defeated.
*** At this time & place only 1 of the 3 is qualified & has been paying his political dues for quite some time now, “Caruso!” The other two have not reached that platform as of yet but show potential @ times. *** Decided votes for candidates so far: Malloy, Jepsen, Himes & Blumenthal. ***
Inner Circle has more CONVICTION than a Home Plate umpire on the payoff pitch!
browardbaseball.com/pics/umpire.jpg <–
Lamont all the way Troll is correct.